Another raving review that read to me like someone trying to justify spending 18 hours with a mediocre work of art.

See this paragraph for instance:

What the concept of “late style” allows us to see in the new Twin Peaks is the sense in which the show’s unresolved, intransigent style stems from a feeling of disappointment with the notion of the well-made work of art. Instead of the nostalgic recreation of a familiar form, Lynch gives us broken bits of what we loved, collaged together in surprising, often baffling ways. The series rejects smooth pacing, narrative efficiency, and well-defined character arcs. Plot threads are introduced and abandoned seemingly at will. Unexplained gaps in the story are the norm. The show plays inconsistent games with chronology, running roughshod over narrative continuity. It taunts its audience with gratuitous, overly specific references to characters we never meet (“Remember that guy, Sammy?” remarks Hutch at one point, apropos of nothing. “He passed away. Good guy.”) When The Return does offer us a classical, almost Aristotelian scene of resolution (with all the characters from the season’s various strands congregated into a single room), Lynch shows us just how unreal and unsatisfying such narrative resolution can feel: I speak, ahem, of Freddy’s magic green gardening glove. There is a falseness, and no small element of wish fulfillment, to this presentation of evil bested with a final punch, a point that Lynch drives home by superimposing Cooper’s slow-motion face over the remainder of the scene.

Interestingly, I could use almost the same writing if I ever wrote a cohesive review explaining why I think The Return was a failure.

What makes Season 3 difficult to dismiss or just completely bash is that Lynch clearly aimed to create scenes in it with characters who encapsulate that whole 'jumping the shark' scenario. You can't tell me that Lynch (who thought him up) had Freddie Sykes in mind as a heroic figure who we would all laud for years afterwards. The first time I saw his scene bashing the BOB ball, it felt like Lynch was parodying Twin Peaks at its very worst. This was even worse than Josie in a doorknob. Lynch seemed to delight in having quite rudimentary and laughable special effects, like in the Sarah bar scene of her biting the trucker.

What is the reason for all this or the point? Firstly, it makes us question what we are seeing. Secondly, it definitely acted as a big contrast to the final episode. If the final episode was more fantastical than anything that went before it, why did it feel more REAL? That alone makes Season 3 interesting.

But I do think there is a method to Lynch's madness in S3 - why do we see no wildlife in Twin Peaks - no owls, birds, or anything of that sort? Everything pretty much there also feels quite 'still' - we don't barely ever see the old trees blowing in the wind imagery. Why is this? Well, it makes us feel not at home in Twin Peaks. We see an owl in Las Vegas - would that happen in reality anyone?

When Chad is the one diving into the doughnuts at Lucy's desk, the audience certainly knows that this is not a place we feel too happy in. I would only hope that Season 4 could be the real 'return to Twin Peaks' and bring back some of the warmth of the town and Cooper, in contrast to the darkness.

I would only hope that Season 4 could be the real 'return to Twin Peaks' and bring back some of the warmth of the town and Cooper, in contrast to the darkness.

Are we done moving the goalposts for what constitutes "real sequels" yet or

He didn't put forth any reservations about S 3's established status as a sequel or question its right to be accepted as such. He merely expressed his wishes about the direction/tone of the potential S 4. Oh, right, I guess he's being "selfish".

Are we done moving the goalposts for what constitutes "real sequels" yet or

He didn't put forth any reservations about S 3's established status as a sequel or question its right to be accepted as such. He merely expressed his wishes about the direction/tone of the potential S 4. Oh, right, I guess he's being "selfish".

"Season 4 could be the real return" as if there's a specific requirement for a Twin Peaks sequel to be a sequel. I know what he's expressing, I didn't say he couldn't sir. IMO it's not on the selfish side of the fandom spiel continuum but that's just me.

- why do we see no wildlife in Twin Peaks - no owls, birds, or anything of that sort? Everything pretty much there also feels quite 'still' - we don't barely ever see the old trees blowing in the wind imagery. Why is this? Well, it makes us feel not at home in Twin Peaks. We see an owl in Las Vegas - would that happen in reality anyone?

Good observation on the "still" feeling. I hadn't put much thought to that. It was this year that I first took time to watch "Eraserhead." That stillness permeates much of it, IMO, but I would call it more a claustrophobic, "oxygen deprived" sensation in some of those windowless passageways and exchanges w/ the neighbor lady in the hallway for example.

In TP:TR with Bushnell Mullins, as comparison: that office was all interiorized and even the top ranking suits didn't earn a window view. High ceilings open- and transparent office walls, and probably had skylights overhead but for me it emphasized detachment from the outside, from nature.

I still want to know what the red balloons were about. One of a handful of crumbs leading me down a trail. The familiar setting of Twin Peaks felt out of reach and its creator out of touch. The mystery of Laura Palmer utterly messed around with, like a sick joke no one gets though everyone tries to. And the whole art of storytelling ridiculed and emptied of meaning.

If anything, I learned to get enjoyment from re-watching an episode/ Part, to detect things unnoticed earlier. And I'm applying that to other things I watch. I went back to revisit "Better Call Saul" after a year's absence, had only gotten through 5-6 episodes at the time. THIS time, it's so very good! Artfully conceived and brilliantly executed storytelling. I'm using it as an example what seems to be a neat trick whereby TP:TR introduced me to the notion of looking for things, noticing things, the 2nd time around.Without availability of meaning nor access to some resolution, though, those repeat viewings of TPTR at the time, were their own fulfillment. I have no idea how I'd want to go watch it all again.

SpookyDollhouse, are you of the "profoundly disappointed" or just plain "disappointed" viewpoint? I mention this because it seems almost every post of yours I've seen in this thread is kinda antagonistic towards the disappointed. Just an observation, I'm not bothered by it and maybe I'm just interpreting your tone wrong.

Anyhoo, to stay on topic: I ended up being pretty disappointed overall with TP:TR. I still enjoyed the hell out of watching it and theorizing like crazy about it every week, but it just didn't have that captivating magic of the original. I KNOW, I KNOW, that's basically the whole point of it... but that's just how I feel! I have some real life friends who would think I'm a crazy idiot for expressing a negative viewpoint of TP:TR, there's no reasoning with them either. I was initially disappointed with Part 8 when it first aired and someone I know would just not hear me out at all on why I didn't like it. Although in retrospect, I do actually think that episode was cool.

Disappointment aside, I'm not PROFOUNDLY disappointed. I will still most likely get the Blu-Ray and I am definitely all about the possibility of another season!

kitty666cats wrote:SpookyDollhouse, are you of the "profoundly disappointed" or just plain "disappointed" viewpoint? I mention this because it seems almost every post of yours I've seen in this thread is kinda antagonistic towards the disappointed. Just an observation, I'm not bothered by it and maybe I'm just interpreting your tone wrong.

Not profoundly disappointed, I'd say. It wasn't and isn't my intention to come off antagonistic toward anyone. IMO typical fandom debates that inevitably lead to "x-thing isn't real/would be better if done my way/his way/this way/thing is bad and people who like it are bad" spiel admittedly get to me (of which have been showing up here, & elsewhere), and I don't respond to those out of "I'm right and you're wrong" intention, but to get whoever's saying those things to maybe think a bit about what they're saying, and if they'd think a little differently on the subject. That happened a couple weeks ago with a book me and a friend read; he had a similar sort of jive and I just turned it around a lil bit, and he's like "wow, I didn't think about it that way, I appreciate it more but I don't know if I like it."

Being disappointed in something isn't inherently antagonistic; being pompous about what you're disappointed in is, for a lack of a better term, disappointing. I think debating those viewpoints and attitudes is a good thing. (for a better part of the thread, I never felt compelled to chime in because it's been typical disappointment talk, I don't have much to expound upon there)

Of course, no one has to answer me if they don't feel they should argue what they think, it's an internet forum afterall! If anyone wants to take a dig at me for being pompous for feeling that way, no big deal either. I know where I stand and have said what I feel I should.

Being disappointed in something isn't inherently antagonistic; being pompous about what you're disappointed in is, for a lack of a better term, disappointing. I think debating those viewpoints and attitudes is a good thing. (for a better part of the thread, I never felt compelled to chime in because it's been typical disappointment talk, I don't have much to expound upon there).

Of course, no one has to answer me if they don't feel they should argue what they think, it's an internet forum afterall! If anyone wants to take a dig at me for being pompous for feeling that way, no big deal either. I know where I stand and have said what I feel I should.

Oh yes, this is an internet forum and you really are right where you belong my friend... Sorry Mr Judge and Jury, I'm just trying hard not to be rude. At least the REALLY disappointed ones don't wander elsewhere to continuously lecture the others like you do, while defending themselves to do so (of course). Maybe you should try to criticize this awful parody of a TV series, rather than repeatedly criticize the other members in their own thread? I have to admit, criticizing the 'way of being disappointed', that's a good trick, a bit sneaky maybe, but slick...

What makes Season 3 difficult to dismiss or just completely bash is that Lynch clearly aimed to create scenes in it with characters who encapsulate that whole 'jumping the shark' scenario. You can't tell me that Lynch (who thought him up) had Freddie Sykes in mind as a heroic figure who we would all laud for years afterwards. The first time I saw his scene bashing the BOB ball, it felt like Lynch was parodying Twin Peaks at its very worst. This was even worse than Josie in a doorknob. Lynch seemed to delight in having quite rudimentary and laughable special effects, like in the Sarah bar scene of her biting the trucker.

What is the reason for all this or the point? Firstly, it makes us question what we are seeing. Secondly, it definitely acted as a big contrast to the final episode. If the final episode was more fantastical than anything that went before it, why did it feel more REAL? That alone makes Season 3 interesting.

But I do think there is a method to Lynch's madness in S3 - why do we see no wildlife in Twin Peaks - no owls, birds, or anything of that sort? Everything pretty much there also feels quite 'still' - we don't barely ever see the old trees blowing in the wind imagery. Why is this? Well, it makes us feel not at home in Twin Peaks. We see an owl in Las Vegas - would that happen in reality anyone?

When Chad is the one diving into the doughnuts at Lucy's desk, the audience certainly knows that this is not a place we feel too happy in. I would only hope that Season 4 could be the real 'return to Twin Peaks' and bring back some of the warmth of the town and Cooper, in contrast to the darkness.

I noticed the swipe at "green glove' in Final Dossier, in the same breath Preston wrapping her head around the things they saw- and the WKLP? mystery altering.

I think the final 2 parts felt more real because it was the narrative doubling back on itelf, uncanny resonances, like Lost Highway. And like Lynch told Nochimson, and Final Dossier reiterates, these events were real. (btw I just saw Coherence , a great quantum physics movie- and improvised, apparently.) The books also make it feel real to me, like the 90's books did, as artifacts.

It IS such an icky place to be in, it's masochistic to revisit, this black corn looking-glass reality bubble of Twin Peaks, and when it's not icky, it's self-parodic, and the angel in the red room becomes the robin in BV, warning to not get sentimental. Combined with the end of Final Dossier, everything welcoming about entering Twin Peaks has been reversed, and instead of an enchanted forest framing domestic comedies and dramas, it's bad interminable jokes, demons, a house of horrors, and cursed Indian land chasing you out.

After all these years yearning for a return to the best fictional town ever ever and a new Lynch project, even giving up before Missing Pieces, I selfishly wanted a feast to nourish my soul, and I ended up with food poisoning.

Aqwell wrote:Oh yes, this is an internet forum and you really are right where you belong my friend... Sorry Mr Judge and Jury, I'm just trying hard not to be rude. At least the REALLY disappointed ones don't wander elsewhere to continuously lecture the others like you do, while defending themselves to do so (of course). Maybe you should try to criticize this awful parody of a TV series, rather than repeatedly criticize the other members in their own thread? I have to admit, criticizing the 'way of being disappointed', that's a good trick, a bit sneaky maybe, but slick...

I've only been critical of those being on the antagonistic side about not enjoying a television show. And I'm far from the only one whose noticed that sort of attitude floating about. I got no tricks up my sleeve my dude, that's just like, your onion.

I’ve never revered Lynch as a god like a lot of the people I have met in the fandom, so I’ve been forgivable about what I felt was the sloppiness and unevenness of the new season (that was mapped out and planned unlike the second season). I’m just ultimately disappointed in how mean and dismal he and Frost are In their attitude to this universe. It’s not to say I am right and they are wrong, but again disappointment that I was so far off in my assessment of their beliefs.

SpookyDollhouse wrote:I've only been critical of those being on the antagonistic side about not enjoying a television show.

Hence the 'Profoundly' in the title of the thread... That's your problem man, here you don't have to be critical to other people, only to the show. Maybe you're posting in the wrong thread? I know, Iknow, this is the one at the top of the list and the more crowded, how tempting. Perhaps there is much more disappointed fans than the rumor suggests? So maybe there's still hope NOT to see another terrible season, which would surely bury Twin Peaks forever, if not already done.

They spent 4 years to come out with things like 119! HELLOOO-OOO-OOO ! and the other Doogie lines...That's not depressing at all.